Review of Successful Litigation Against English Health Trusts in the Treatment of Adults with Orthopaedic Pathology

Atrey, Amit; Gupte, Chinmay; Corbett, Stephen

doi:10.2106/jbjs.j.00277

Cited by 79 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Costs were calculated from Clegg et al 12 and Atrey et al 9 for screening, treatment and potential litigation. This framework was then applied to the results of the treatment protocol.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Twenty years experience of selective secondary ultrasound screening for congenital dislocation of the hip

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Costs were calculated from Clegg et al 12 and Atrey et al 9 for screening, treatment and potential litigation. This framework was then applied to the results of the treatment protocol.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Litigation concerning missed diagnosis of DDH is increasing 8. Atrey et al 9 examined the National Health Service Litigation Authority over a 10-year period and found that DDH was the third most common cause in paediatric orthopaedics with an average cost of £48 534.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty years experience of selective secondary ultrasound screening for congenital dislocation of the hip

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Between 2000 and 2006, there were 73 successful cases of litigation, related to trauma of the foot and ankle, in the UK 73. Each received an average payment equivalent to $125,773 73…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding risks and complications in the management of ankle fractures

Mehta

Rees

Cutler

et al. 2014

IJOO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ankle fracture (AF) is a common injury with potentially significant morbidity associated with it. The most common age groups affected are young active patients, sustaining high energy trauma and elderly patients with comorbidities. Both these groups pose unique challenges for appropriate management of these injuries. Young patients are at risk of developing posttraumatic osteoarthritis, with a significant impact on quality of life due to pain and impaired function. Elderly patients, especially with poorly controlled diabetes and osteoporosis are at increased risk of wound complications, infection and failure of fixation. In the most severe cases, this can lead to amputation and mortality. Therefore, individualized approach to the management of AF is vital. This article highlights commonly encountered complications and discusses the measures needed to minimize them when dealing with these injuries.

show abstract

“…This specialty was chosen because it is associated with a relatively high level of harm 12. For example, from 2000 to 2006, an equivalent of US$321 million was paid in adult orthopaedic surgery-related negligence settlements in the UK 13. Similar figures were reported the Physician Insurers Association of America 14…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The orthopaedic error index: development and application of a novel national indicator for assessing the relative safety of hospital care using a cross-sectional approach

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe Orthopaedic Error Index for hospitals aims to provide the first national assessment of the relative safety of provision of orthopaedic surgery.DesignCross-sectional study (retrospective analysis of records in a database).SettingThe National Reporting and Learning System is the largest national repository of patient-safety incidents in the world with over eight million error reports. It offers a unique opportunity to develop novel approaches to enhancing patient safety, including investigating the relative safety of different healthcare providers and specialties.ParticipantsWe extracted all orthopaedic error reports from the system over 1 year (2009–2010).Outcome measuresThe Orthopaedic Error Index was calculated as a sum of the error propensity and severity. All relevant hospitals offering orthopaedic surgery in England were then ranked by this metric to identify possible outliers that warrant further attention.Results155 hospitals reported 48 971 orthopaedic-related patient-safety incidents. The mean Orthopaedic Error Index was 7.09/year (SD 2.72); five hospitals were identified as outliers. Three of these units were specialist tertiary hospitals carrying out complex surgery; the remaining two outlier hospitals had unusually high Orthopaedic Error Indexes: mean 14.46 (SD 0.29) and 15.29 (SD 0.51), respectively.ConclusionsThe Orthopaedic Error Index has enabled identification of hospitals that may be putting patients at disproportionate risk of orthopaedic-related iatrogenic harm and which therefore warrant further investigation. It provides the prototype of a summary index of harm to enable surveillance of unsafe care over time across institutions. Further validation and scrutiny of the method will be required to assess its potential to be extended to other hospital specialties in the UK and also internationally to other health systems that have comparable national databases of patient-safety incidents.

show abstract

Review of Successful Litigation Against English Health Trusts in the Treatment of Adults with Orthopaedic Pathology

Abstract: These findings highlight the fact that education and vigilance remain important components of orthopaedic training as many of the cases of successful litigation had a preventable cause.

Cited by 79 publications

References 7 publications

Twenty years experience of selective secondary ultrasound screening for congenital dislocation of the hip

Twenty years experience of selective secondary ultrasound screening for congenital dislocation of the hip

Understanding risks and complications in the management of ankle fractures

The orthopaedic error index: development and application of a novel national indicator for assessing the relative safety of hospital care using a cross-sectional approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About